Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Draft:Edna Marie O'Dowd (2nd nomination)

 __NOINDEX__
 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the miscellaneous page below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result of the discussion was  delete. Ricky81682 (talk) 09:38, 14 August 2015 (UTC)

Draft:Edna Marie O'Dowd (2nd nomination)

 * Abandoned draft, former WP:FAKEARTICLE before being moved to wikispace. During first nomination, User:Ftomberlin indicated that he intended to edit the page, then abandoned it again as soon as the MfD was withdrawn. No edits for two months. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:46, 3 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Abandoned draft, former WP:FAKEARTICLE before being moved to wikispace. During first nomination, User:Ftomberlin indicated that he intended to edit the page, then abandoned it again as soon as the MfD was withdrawn. No edits for two months. --Guy Macon (talk) 15:46, 3 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Oppose deletion. Replace with Inactive userpage blanked.  Reasonable draft, it might survive AfD.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 05:59, 4 August 2015 (UTC)


 * I have no objections to replacement with inactive userpage blanked instead of deletion. Clearly User:Ftomberlin has no intention of developing this stale draft further, (and indeed has not edited Wikipedia since 18 June 2015), but that does not stop someone else from doing so. Good solution, SmokeyJoe.


 * The article itself seems pretty good at first glance (but I know nothing about emerging artist of the 1960's). Does anyone think that it is ready to be moved into mainspace? I am having trouble convincing myself that it is notable, but someone familiar with the subject might be able to fix that by adding refs. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: I moved the following from my talk page and left a link to here. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * You have too much time on your hands. I have not abandoned the article . I am waiting for the book to he published so that I can make citations necessary to support the article. I thought it was located in a place where I could keep the content safe and out of anyone's view. Not fake. Perhaps you could help rather than focus on deletion.2600:100E:B023:6FBF:660E:E265:6E62:15 (talk) 16:43, 4 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Note: I moved the following from my talk page. --Guy Macon (talk) 17:38, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Guy,
 * I apologize. I am having great difficulty adhering to all the policies of Wikpedia and am having even greater difficulty correcting issues with my main article. I know how to cite, but navigating Wikipedia (excluding basic HTML) has proven to be a problematic endeavor. I understand that I must remove speculative assertions within my article and support it with credible citations. Is there a place where my article can sit safely for a time longer than a month? OR is that against policy because there is only so much space available on Wikipedia. I would surmise that would make my edits and revisions more time-sensitive. Please clarify. ....and thank you. Ftomberlin (talk) 17:28, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * How are you getting quotes from a book that has not been published? Are you planning to use as the major source for this article a book that you have written? -- TRPoD aka The Red Pen of Doom  17:44, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * A person connected to the subject of an article (as this editor apparently is) can be aware of a forthcoming book without being the author of same. That said, the safest place for this article would be to copy it to someplace outside Wikipedia as I don't believe it meets the requirements to remain. Etamni &#124; &#9993; &#124; ✓ 08:48, 8 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Comment. Ftomberlin removed the MFD tag from the draft despite clear instructions not to do so.  I have added it back. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Delete - Wikipedia is not a WP:MEMORIAL, this draft has no chance ever to be moved to main space. Person is non-notable, sources are blogs, Wikipedia, OR and other questionable things. The tone and the prose are actually way off the encyclopedic requirements here, and the author probably intends to rather add more of the WP:WEASELy language. Kraxler (talk) 18:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Twice I have asked Ftomberlin to respond here instead of on my talk page. The question in my mind is whether this refusal to follow instructions is deliberate or just a case of a well-meaning newbie having trouble figuring out how Wikipedia works. --Guy Macon (talk) 18:24, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * "Well-meaning" is not really an adequate description. This user is an SPA, who wants to memorialize his high school sweetheart mother, corrected, see here and is WP:NOTHERE to build an encyclopedia. Look at his user contributions, all about Edna, only other edits are a handful to Drake Levin and Cecil B. DeMille. Kraxler (talk) 18:38, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ...and he was told yet again where to respond: Teahouse/Questions Do we have a WP:CIR problem here? --Guy Macon (talk) 19:45, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
 * I think you've hit it on the head, along with other possibly unresolved issues. After reading the draft, WP:NOTMEMORIAL comes to mind as an additional reason for deleting or blanking the page, and there may be WP:BLP issues as well. Etamni &#124; &#9993; &#124; ✓ 08:48, 8 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Blank or delete (either works for me) Etamni &#124; &#9993; &#124; ✓ 08:48, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Delete as per User:Kraxler. Just delete it now or we'll have to wait 6 months and then delete it as per WP:G13. -- P 1 9 9 ✉ 13:42, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * More Info: Ftomberlin still refuses to engage in a conversation here, but has commented elsewhere. In this edit he reveals that Edna Marie O'Dowd was his mother, which means that he is an editor with a COI. In this edit he blanked the page(and was reverted), which would seem to imply that he would not object to either blanking or deletion. --Guy Macon (talk) 16:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Given the results of extensive investigation, it is more clear that the appropriate thing to do is Delete with reference to Alternative outlets. There may be some possibility that the subject is notable or worth mention in some article, but this page is a family history testimonial.  It is a memorial, not a scholarly work.  Memorials are great things, very important for us, but Wikipedia is not the place for them.  --SmokeyJoe (talk) 00:28, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the page's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.